Your opinion on my betrayal of Jim Jannard

[ChiliMost]

I'm a long-time Nikon fanboy... I have tons of Nikon lenses, a few Nikon bodies, including the D2Xs.

But I have to say, that the D90 has inspired me to NOT BUY A NIKON EVER AGAIN. Seriously, my eyes hurt after watching those examples. How could anyone ever be happy with that?

The D3 is a thing of beauty. Much better than the D2X.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

The D3 is a thing of beauty. Much better than the D2X.

Of course it is... I almost upgraded to it, but I haven't worn out the D2Xs just yet, so I'll probably go for the D3's successor next year. ...Unless RED convinces me otherwise.

As for the D90. As a stills camera, it looks to be great. But I feel violated that they would even release a "prosumer" camera of this type and even hype up the video ability when I have seen cell phones that take more pleasing video. And that's what I'm talking about here... The D90. It's like a kick in the nuts to a lot of us who hoped Nikon would deliver on some of their claims.

 

[ChiliMost]

Of course it is... I almost upgraded to it, but I haven't worn out the D2Xs just yet, so I'll probably go for the D3's successor next year. ...Unless RED convinces me otherwise.

As for the D90. As a stills camera, it looks to be great. But I feel violated that they would even release a "prosumer" camera of this type and even hype up the video ability when I have seen cell phones that take more pleasing video. And that's what I'm talking about here... The D90. It's like a kick in the nuts to a lot of us who hoped Nikon would deliver on some of their claims.

More than one D2X? That's an interesting combination. Are you a wedding photographer?

The D90 I wouldn't even call prosumer. It's really their entry level DSLR and yeah the video is shite. The D300/D700 is more their prosumer line.

I hope Nikon learns a lot from their first and miserable attempt at video on a DSLR. One thing is they don't have a competing line of camcorder so they have nothing to lose by making it as good as they can. Also they will have Zeiss lens capability with the F-Mount, but no auto focus of course.

 

[Jason Ing]

Not quite sure what you're getting at here, and I don't have a library of my work or full 1080p images available on the MacBook I'm using at the moment. But I happen to have a few HVX200 small JPEGs that demonstrate some of the qualities I describe above.

All were shot open or nearly open, at full tele, with the Century converter added. There's nice shallow DoF at this focal length, but unfortunately it's not portable to a majority of situations. The two deer demonstrate what I think is nice about the HVX: the handling of color, especially in low-contrast situations like an overcast day, is quite pretty. Those shots also show a main weakness of the camera. The shots aren't out of focus -- the HVX really is that soft, even in reductions like these.

The red fox shows what I managed to get fully open, 1/24 shutter speed, in the latter half of magic hour. I was amazed that I could pull out even this much in Photoshop -- the untreated file was an ugly gray wash.

I guess my other related question would be what are you planning to shoot. My thought is that maybe the 5D is good enough for you and your material. I think you already are saying you know you're settling/compromising. Don't get me wrong when I say this, but I think the attitude is that if you're not going to create the Mona Lisa, then why by the best brushes and paints when crayola crayons is good enough for your art project and artistic level. I'm sure the 5D will be good enough to a certain level.

There's no betrayal here. You decided you didn't need that level of professional, high-end camera and opted for something that's at your level. Jim made the Red One and Epic for a certain level of artists and craftsmen. He even said he isn't interested at all in making consumer level stuff.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

More than one D2X? That's an interesting combination. Are you a wedding photographer?

That's "D2Xs" as in that is the model. In Nikon-speak, the "s" means second edition or revised. There will most likely be a "D3s" before there is a "D4". And no, I don't do weddings.

The D90 I wouldn't even call prosumer. It's really their entry level DSLR and yeah the video is shite. The D300/D700 is more their prosumer line.

I agree, but then again, Nikon is pushing the D90 hard to the "prosumer" crowd. In fact, they are really targeting the wedding shooter, since you brought it up.

I hope Nikon learns a lot from their first and miserable attempt at video on a DSLR. One thing is they don't have a competing line of camcorder so they have nothing to lose by making it as good as they can. Also they will have Zeiss lens capability with the F-Mount, but no auto focus of course.

Yep. Hopefully their next attempt is a lot better. But I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

[MadamImAdam]

When I posted this tongue-in-cheek poll, I really expected that most people would get it: It was a compliment to Red Digital Cinema, pointing out the unique attachment we feel to Red and its mission.

Interchangeable 35mm lenses and a large sensor at a price under six figures used to be exclusive territory of Red. If an indie filmmaker wanted to take the step up to the 35mm-lenses/large-sensor level, there was just one choice.

Now there isn't -- and Red is probably responsible for that. The old guard isn't a monopoly, but they all liked and obeyed the market stratification they had created in the motion-picture space: Crippled prosumer products for mass retail sales at a low price, and high-level professional products for more selective sales at a high price.

Jim Jannard came along and messed up their game. He attacked from the top -- by offering their pro features and more at a fraction of their artificially high prices. I know that Red's attack hurt deeply. As the Red One was about to reach the market, I happened to attend a Varicamp presentation by a senior Panasonic executive. The FUD he threw at Red was unbelievably overstated.

And I mean unbelievably overstated. The FUD was impossible to believe because it was so emotional and over-the-top. People who don't feel threatened are calm and easygoing, not desperate. This man mentioned every drawback he could about the Red -- even if he obviously didn't have enough direct evidence to support his strong assertions -- and simply pretended the ways in which the Red One was superior didn't exist at all.

Of course, he delivered his FUD under the guise of "teaching" his audience about cameras. Sure, use the Red One if you want to deal with [insert list of overstated negatives he couldn't possibly be sure about]. Sure, use the Red if you're [insert a description of the kind of person nobody on Earth would want to be]. Feel free! I'm being open-minded about it!

I knew then that this executive felt that the Red One could kill or at least seriously injure the Varicam. He felt threatened. Red's attack from the top hurt.

The industry's response has been to counter-attack from below. Canon is offering a sensor even bigger than the Red One's along with the ability to use 35mm still lenses -- down at the prosumer level. Where Red wasn't ready, but they were, because they have merely been crippling these products. Canon had to make sure their new product was inferior to their own upper-level products, but it nonetheless represents a major step forward at the prosumer level -- where fixed lenses and 1/3" chips are the norm.

The 5D2 isn't the Red One and never will be. But it did kill Scarlet. Red, by its own account, did not want to come out with a 2/3" fixed-lens camera for $3K once the Nikon and Canon offerings were on the market. The superiority of Scarlet in features other than lens and sensor size would not have been compelling enough in this new market.

I was in that category of prospective Red One buyer who would have bought Scarlet instead of the Red One if it were available. Absent Scarlet, nothing else appealed to me other than the Red One, even if the Red One was way too much camera for my needs. There simply wasn't another significant step up from the HVX200 level with value-for-cost anywhere close to Red One.

But the 5D2 is close enough to what Scarlet was (superior in some ways, inferior in others) to earn my attention. I didn't even know about the 5D2 until I read about it in Jim's post announcing that Scarlet 1 had been scrapped in response to it. Because Red took the 5D2 so seriously that it killed the Scarlet I wanted, I figured it was worth looking into.

I'm not alone in seriously investigating what the 5D2 can ultimately deliver (by "seriously" I mean with an eye toward how good it could be at its best, not merely how bad it is at its worst). I'm not alone in withdrawing a Red One deposit because of it. And many people like me who would have bought the old Scarlet will be using the 5D2 instead (and will likely also buy the new Scarlet down the road -- when a camera is $3K, you can buy the latest-greatest every year or two).

My tongue-in-cheek poll was about how awkward this is -- to be gaining value from a company like Canon because of what Red has started. As a buyer, I'm going to go where I find the best value for the money -- I know that Jim doesn't actually expect anything else. And he has certainly demonstrated his perceived value of the 5D2 in a major way. (Ironically, Canon will be responsible for whatever nuclear bomb Red will detonate on Nov. 13. And I'll be laughing with malice.)

This is how markets work, but not choosing Red feels different than not choosing Sony or Panasonic or Globo-Chem. I'd buy Sony over Panasonic without feeling the slightest twinge of guilt. Not so with Red. The guilt is not devastating, of course, but it is there. And that was such a unique thing to feel related to buying a material good that I remarked upon it.

In case you still haven't noticed: This remark was a compliment to the special company that is Red Digital Cinema.

I actually thought that Red partisans -- especially Red partisans -- would get it. I would never have predicted that they'd feel threatened enough to start throwing FUD.

And I've been surprised to recognize in the FUD here what I saw in that Panasonic executive's FUD: Over-the-top assertions of fact made with a confidence that couldn't possibly be justified. Implied or outright denigration of the kind of person who would stoop to using such a thing. (It does make me wonder what they think of Ellen Kuras using a consumer mini-DV camcorder to shoot a feature film -- and if they'd say it to her face.) And the weirdest: A strident insistence that the Red One is superior -- even though nobody here, myself included, has stated or implied otherwise.

I didn't see it coming. Thought there would just be a few chuckles from people who felt the same affection and admiration for Red.

 

[Eddie]

Red had nothing to do with the canon 5d... that is all due to nikon. (maybe thats why there weren´t that many chuckles) :bleh:

Personally I don´t think canon is gonna respond to Red1 at all. They are quite happy selling some more L glass, but they will respond to scarlet at some point. And when they do, everybody is gonna know it.

 

[Jason Ing]

When I posted this tongue-in-cheek poll, I really expected that most people would get it: It was a compliment to Red Digital Cinema, pointing out the unique attachment we feel to Red and its mission.

Interchangeable 35mm lenses and a large sensor at a price under six figures used to be exclusive territory of Red. If an indie filmmaker wanted to take the step up to the 35mm-lenses/large-sensor level, there was just one choice.

Now there isn't -- and Red is probably responsible for that. The old guard isn't a monopoly, but they all liked and obeyed the market stratification they had created in the motion-picture space: Crippled prosumer products for mass retail sales at a low price, and high-level professional products for more selective sales at a high price.

Jim Jannard came along and messed up their game. He attacked from the top -- by offering their pro features and more at a fraction of their artificially high prices. I know that Red's attack hurt deeply. As the Red One was about to reach the market, I happened to attend a Varicamp presentation by a senior Panasonic executive. The FUD he threw at Red was unbelievably overstated.

And I mean unbelievably overstated. The FUD was impossible to believe because it was so emotional and over-the-top. People who don't feel threatened are calm and easygoing, not desperate. This man mentioned every drawback he could about the Red -- even if he obviously didn't have enough direct evidence to support his strong assertions -- and simply pretended the ways in which the Red One was superior didn't exist at all.

Of course, he delivered his FUD under the guise of "teaching" his audience about cameras. Sure, use the Red One if you want to deal with [insert list of overstated negatives he couldn't possibly be sure about]. Sure, use the Red if you're [insert a description of the kind of person nobody on Earth would want to be]. Feel free! I'm being open-minded about it!

I knew then that this executive felt that the Red One could kill or at least seriously injure the Varicam. He felt threatened. Red's attack from the top hurt.

The industry's response has been to counter-attack from below. Canon is offering a sensor even bigger than the Red One's along with the ability to use 35mm still lenses -- down at the prosumer level. Where Red wasn't ready, but they were, because they have merely been crippling these products. Canon had to make sure their new product was inferior to their own upper-level products, but it nonetheless represents a major step forward at the prosumer level -- where fixed lenses and 1/3" chips are the norm.

The 5D2 isn't the Red One and never will be. But it did kill Scarlet. Red, by its own account, did not want to come out with a 2/3" fixed-lens camera for $3K once the Nikon and Canon offerings were on the market. The superiority of Scarlet in features other than lens and sensor size would not have been compelling enough in this new market.

I was in that category of prospective Red One buyer who would have bought Scarlet instead of the Red One if it were available. Absent Scarlet, nothing else appealed to me other than the Red One, even if the Red One was way too much camera for my needs. There simply wasn't another significant step up from the HVX200 level with value-for-cost anywhere close to Red One.

But the 5D2 is close enough to what Scarlet was (superior in some ways, inferior in others) to earn my attention. I didn't even know about the 5D2 until I read about it in Jim's post announcing that Scarlet 1 had been scrapped in response to it. Because Red took the 5D2 so seriously that it killed the Scarlet I wanted, I figured it was worth looking into.

I'm not alone in seriously investigating what the 5D2 can ultimately deliver (by "seriously" I mean with an eye toward how good it could be at its best, not merely how bad it is at its worst). I'm not alone in withdrawing a Red One deposit because of it. And many people like me who would have bought the old Scarlet will be using the 5D2 instead (and will likely also buy the new Scarlet down the road -- when a camera is $3K, you can buy the latest-greatest every year or two).

My tongue-in-cheek poll was about how awkward this is -- to be gaining value from a company like Canon because of what Red has started. As a buyer, I'm going to go where I find the best value for the money -- I know that Jim doesn't actually expect anything else. And he has certainly demonstrated his perceived value of the 5D2 in a major way. (Ironically, Canon will be responsible for whatever nuclear bomb Red will detonate on Nov. 13. And I'll be laughing with malice.)

This is how markets work, but not choosing Red feels different than not choosing Sony or Panasonic or Globo-Chem. I'd buy Sony over Panasonic without feeling the slightest twinge of guilt. Not so with Red. The guilt is not devastating, of course, but it is there. And that was such a unique thing to feel related to buying a material good that I remarked upon it.

In case you still haven't noticed: This remark was a compliment to the special company that is Red Digital Cinema.

I actually thought that Red partisans -- especially Red partisans -- would get it. I would never have predicted that they'd feel threatened enough to start throwing FUD.

And I've been surprised to recognize in the FUD here what I saw in that Panasonic executive's FUD: Over-the-top assertions of fact made with a confidence that couldn't possibly be justified. Implied or outright denigration of the kind of person who would stoop to using such a thing. (It does make me wonder what they think of Ellen Kuras using a consumer mini-DV camcorder to shoot a feature film -- and if they'd say it to her face.) And the weirdest: A strident insistence that the Red One is superior -- even though nobody here, myself included, has stated or implied otherwise.

I didn't see it coming. Thought there would just be a few chuckles from people who felt the same affection and admiration for Red.

Guess you have to work on your writing skills too. Or polling skills.

 

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

Guess you have to work on your writing skills too. Or polling skills.

Or trolling skills...

:clown2:

 

[Andrew M.]

You'd convert to Cineform or Prores or uncompressed before doing any post anything. That's the same workflow as a lot of cameras out there that capture with a lot of compression. Even RED is unusable for most of us without a transcode at the moment. (hopefully the Adobe plugin will change that)

The real question is how bad does the h.264 degrade the image on capture? I don't think we truly know yet. Some side by side test vs. RED or Scarlet will be interesting.

Of course Scarlet just might have a 35mm sensor and a true ISO 500 for $6500 when we wake up on November 13th...I just hope they give me $17,500 in credit at the RED store so I can buy 3 Scarlets if that happens.

RED RAW is the single channel Bayer stream of data. You can extract any format you do want from it and edit accordingly. You can’t convert H.264 back to Bayer single channel, it will be guessing work what should we extrapolate this in to.
Will not work, you get blobs of data instead of pixels.